From the Right:
Thanks to this powerful visual aide my point is easily made and all can see that there is a liar in the White house. Conservatives like myself have been more than terrified at some of the promises made by President Obama while he was on the campaign trail. We continue to fear the threats he makes to diminish American freedom. But the facts are less scary because Barack is more a man of words than he is a man of action. He has done little to change the direction of this country; he has done much more to continue the failed policies of the past. It is hard to believe that Barack Hussien Obama once spoke out against controversial wire-tapping, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the growing federal deficit, all things which he has officially signed off on as president of the United States of America. This man is much more than your standard political deceiver, he companied on change, and once in office he continued the failing policies of previous administrations and put an end to the ones with the potential to create better jobs and a better America. It is amusing to me that a man who promised the middle and lower class a better way of life wrote a blank check to wall street in his first hundred days.
Some may argue that the bailouts had a limit and are “well designed,” but the truth is that there is fifty seven billion or so that our good fried Tim Geithner is trying to find. And any company who stretches its economic branches into multiple areas of the economy will be considered “too big to fail” and will receive whatever help they may need when struggling. This is not bankruptcy (the more traditional way to restructure failing businesses) this is a new presidential way of dealing with failure, it bypass’s the courts and the people and allows wall street direct access to the legislative and executive branches of government. Yes, this is where the big checks are written. And they are not being written to those making less than a quarter million dollars a year. Speaking of a quarter of a million dollars I believe that is what each American currently owes toward the federal deficit if we were to pay off our debt today.
What hope and what change? That’s the question I had for those of you who struggle to access the God given lie detector built into the human sole. If you don’t trust a telemarketer or televangelist promising you the world, why would you trust a politician who promises the same things. If this is stressing you out go smoke a cigarette and remember that the only tax increase the chosen one has signed into law, was the one you paid when you bought those Cigarettes.
-LH
Ps. I hope I have not offended our smoking audience I simply wish to point out the president’s tax.

FROM THE LEFT: Look I am the first one to admit that I am no expert on the economy so I found someone who is. This economist graduated from MIT with a Ph. D and Yale University. He also received the coveted Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics. Here is what he had to say...

“So it seems that we aren’t going to have a second Great Depression after all. What saved us? The answer, basically, is Big Government….the financial panic of late 2008 was as severe in some ways, as the banking panic of the early 1930s,…even stock prices — were falling as fast as or faster than they did in 1929-30…So what saved us from a full replay of the Great Depression? The answer, almost surely, lies in the very different role played by government…All of this (stimulus) has helped support the economy in its time of need, in a way that didn’t happen back in 1930, when federal spending was a much smaller percentage of G.D.P. And yes, this means that budget deficits — which are a bad thing in normal times — are actually a good thing right now….The point is that this time, unlike in the 1930s, the government didn’t take a hands-off attitude while much of the banking system collapsed. And that’s another reason we’re not living through Great Depression II….All in all, then, the government has played a crucial stabilizing role in this economic crisis. Ronald Reagan was wrong: sometimes the private sector is the problem, and government is the solution.” Paul Krugman

-CV

From the right:

The economic bailout is just one example of the president breaking his word. During the campaign he preached against the growing deficits but as soon as he was elected, he expanded the defect at an unprecedented rate. The bailout is just one example of how the president breaks his word.

LH

Kennedy's Death And The Fate of Healthcare

FROM THE LEFT:

Democrats are already saying that they will name the health care bill after Ted Kennedy. Health care after all was the "number one cause of his life" and he did encourage Obama to make health care a priority. I can already see the right-wingers saying that Ted Kennedy's death is being exploited, and that this is a desperate move on the part of the Obama Administration. I feel that directing the positive sympathy from Kennedy's death to the health care bill is simply good politics. The man did devote his career to the cause, so channeling the sympathy from his death to resurrect the health care bill is what he would of wanted. I think this may have the power to change the mostly negative feelings toward the health care bill to more positive ones.

Soon the coverage of Kennedy's death will fade, Congress will come back from vacation, and the American people will be focused on healthcare again. The question is can the Obama Administration step up and elevate the debate from "death panels", to the important issues like whether or not we need a public option? Why arent we seeing or hearing a clear and coherent strategy from the Obama people? Are they simply going to play defense and let the Republicans control the debate? A piece of advice to the Obama administration: lay your cards on the table! Come out with what you think healthcare reform should look like. Show that the Republicans have no intrest in bipartisanship and simply want to keep the Obama administration from getting a win.

This shouldn't be that difficult, Obama should come back from vacation rejuvenated and ready to take on the Republicans and the insurance companies that line their pockets. He should tell the American people that the "public option" is necessary to keeping cost down and that it is a way of keeping the insurance companies honest. It is NOT socialized medicine or a complete government take over and if your still frightened ask granny how she feels about her Medicare.

He needs to make this not about politics but about helping your fellow American. After all isn't America the place of equality and it's people the most generous in the world. The Repunlicans constantly talk about "Liberty" and how how important it is to them. But where is the freedom in being forced to file bankruptcy and sell your home in order to pay for your chemotherapy? Don't we as Americans have a moral responsibility to ensure that everyone has access to basic medical care? We are after all the richest country in the world, do we really want a healthcare system that leaves people out because they don't make enough money?

-Chris Vogt

FROM THE RIGHT:

In the world of faith death comes with mixed emotions. Through your faith you are reassured that those who pass on have gone on to a better place as their spirit separates from their body. I find it distasteful to attack the deceased because they are not around to defend themselves. But with prominent members of the family, and the Democratic Party, pulling the death of Ted Kennedy into the healthcare debate, it is near impossible not to bring his life and aspirations into the spotlight. I suppose that is what happens in times like these when the Democratic Part is running a tabloid type campaign trying to take the political and pop culture headlines and use their momentum to push forward there radical agenda.

I am sure that those who follow the pop culture aspect of politics are drooling all over themselves at the idea of naming the healthcare bill after Ted Kennedy. But from my Christian perspective, I would have to assume that Mr. Kennedy would some day look back at the healthcare bill that carries his name, and react in a similar way as George Donner as he looks back at the wagon company baring his name. Donner was a leader in what, at first, seemed like pioneer effort, and later came to be known as a massive failure as the winter closed in and members of the company turned to cannibalism.

Kennedy would bear no benefit as his name was attached to this massive healthcare bill with the potential to “radically remake America” in a very harmful way. Let me also note that I do not believe a man as intelligent as Kennedy would want this bill passed on emotion.

This bill is about 304,059,724 people not one man. And this bill is far too important to pass as a memorial. Give him a library or a statue, but don’t give him health care. The sad fact is that the American people aren’t that sentimental either and the democrat’s efforts to write this off, in loving memory of Ted Kennedy will fail. No, if the president wants to pull this one over the American people he will be forced to return to his weapon of choice, scare tactics. Open your eyes and watch as a new epidemic is blown out of proportion by our government in an effort to shotgun healthcare through the legislative branch of our government.

-Luke Hale

RESPONSE from the LEFT:

Comparing the health care bill to the unfortunate Donner incident is well, way out of left field. It absolutely makes no sense, and it demeans the nobel cause of universal health care. And I still do not understand what you mean by saying Obama is running a "tabloid type campaign". Should he not honor his mentor and the lion of the senate by naming this bill after him??

There is nothing radical about trying to reform the health care system. What is radical is saying that everything is fine and that we're just gonna leave the system alone. Secondly to say that Obama is the one employing scare tactics is laughable. Scare tactics, you want scare tactics?? How about Sara Palin and Rush Limbaugh (the leader of the Rep. Party) repeatedly lying, saying that Obama has some secret plan to kill off old people. Again we are seeing the all too common scenario where Liberals try to honestly fix the problems that plague this nation, and Conservitives simply throw mud at it.

-Chris Vogt

From The Right:

When the left finds a problem they do all they can to through big government at it. Just because there is a problem does not mean we should respond with a really poor solution. Peoples thoughts on the death panels are varied and I am not one who thinks that it is something that Obama or Polosi are trying to shove in this bill, however it is the responsibility of this people (the freest people on earth) to ensure that the government doesn’t take more power than it needs. I am sure that those who voted for Socialism in the form of the Nazis did not think they were voting for death panels and gas chambers. I am not saying our president is planning on genocide, but he is starting the same war on the rich that Hitler started on the Jews. Keep the power out of the hands of government and then you don’t have to worry about what they are going to do with the power. It is a true slap in the face of freedom for our current elected officials to attack the fears of its people and write them off as extreme.

-Luke Hale

FROM THE LEFT: Look so I understand you're taking a principled stand against government interfering in the private market. You said, "Keep the power out of the hands of government." Well by that logic I guess your against Medicare, welfare, and the public school system. I feel this is out of the main stream and not what the American people want. But thats what Republicans stand for. Instead of analyzing an issue and diving into it's complexities, Republicans just label it socialism. How can you constructively debate a Republican when they believe all government in almost every circumstance is bad??

-CV